In today's world, technological innovation has become the main battlefield of international strategic games, and intellectual property is a key chess piece in this game. As a NPC deputy who has worked in the front line of intellectual property education for a long time, I deeply feel the new opportunities and challenges faced by intellectual property talent training. After years of research and reflection, I have submitted a proposal this year to further promote the reform of the intellectual property talent training system, hoping to contribute to the breakthrough in this field. Protecting intellectual property is protecting innovation. Intellectual property protection is essentially an innovative governance mechanism, but in the current education system, it is often simplified as a collection of legal rules. This cognitive bias leads to a focus on training legal thinking in talent development, while neglecting the cultivation of innovative thinking. As an entrepreneur told me in a survey, "What we need is not just talent who knows' how to protect ', but also talent who knows' how to apply'." During my visit and research, I found that there is a mismatch between the training of undergraduate professionals in intellectual property and market demand. The interdisciplinary nature of intellectual property requires breaking down traditional disciplinary barriers, but the mechanism for integrating industry and education is not sound, making it difficult for universities to timely perceive and respond to the needs of industrial transformation. In the face of the above issues, I believe the key lies in achieving breakthroughs in three aspects. The first breakthrough: from "discipline oriented" to "problem oriented". Traditional intellectual property education places too much emphasis on the integrity of the disciplinary system, while neglecting the cultivation of practical problem-solving abilities. The key to breaking the deadlock lies in reshaping the curriculum system and designing teaching content guided by real problems in industrial development. For example, in the field of artificial intelligence, intellectual property talents not only need to master legal knowledge, but also need to understand technical content such as algorithm principles and data governance. For this reason, I suggest building a new curriculum system of "modularization+case-based" to transform abstract theoretical knowledge into concrete problem scenarios. For example, the teaching model of "technical general education+industry analysis+legal application" can be explored, allowing students to naturally integrate multidisciplinary knowledge in the process of solving complex problems. The second breakthrough: from "closed cultivation" to "ecological education". The cultivation of intellectual property talents should not be limited to campus walls, but should be integrated into a broader innovation ecosystem. To this end, I proposed the concept of "ecological education", which aims to achieve resource sharing and complementary advantages through the construction of an open training system involving multiple stakeholders. Specifically, we can rely on the national innovation platform to establish an "Intellectual Property Talent Training Alliance" in key industrial clusters, integrating resources from universities, enterprises, research institutions, intellectual property service agencies, and other parties. Provide students with the opportunity to participate in practical enterprise projects and experience the entire process of intellectual property operation; Invite frontline experts into the classroom to transform cutting-edge practices into teaching cases; Establish a cross institutional mentor team to provide diverse guidance to students. In my research, some innovative enterprises have begun to actively explore the school enterprise collaborative training model. For example, some companies have established "Intellectual Property Innovation Internship Posts" to allow students to participate in the entire process of enterprise patent layout. This approach not only enhances students' practical abilities, but also reserves urgently needed talents for enterprises, achieving a win-win situation. The third breakthrough: from "unified standards" to "characteristic development". The key to solving the homogenization dilemma in talent cultivation lies in promoting the differentiated and distinctive development of intellectual property education. Therefore, I suggest that universities of different regions and types should combine their own advantages and regional industrial characteristics to develop their own distinctive development paths. The key to breaking the deadlock in the cultivation of intellectual property talents ultimately lies in achieving a transformation from a "rule executor" to an "innovation leader". Future intellectual property talents should not only be the implementers of static legal rules, but also the builders of dynamic innovation ecosystems, able to use intellectual property tools to reconstruct innovation rules, optimize resource allocation, and promote open collaboration. I believe that as long as we find the right problem and apply the right medicine to the case, we will be able to find a new way to cultivate intellectual property talents with Chinese characteristics and provide strong talent support and innovation impetus for Chinese path to modernization. (New Society)